Randy Evans: Palin's Trust Fund Does Not Violate "Any Law - Alaska, IRS, or Federal"

Ethics expert Randy Evans attested to the legality of Sarah Palin's legal defense fund, which he created, in an op-ed published yesterday in the Fayette County News. Attorney Evans disclosed that "the Alaska Fund Trust, was drafted and created to mirror the language used by the John Kerry Trust fund," and he says "the Alaska Perkins Coie attorney found that the trust fund document (which it had drafted for John Kerry) was in fact ILLEGAL. In Attorney Evans's opinion, "the only illegality in the matters surrounding the Alaska Fund Trust is the illegal leak of the 'CONFIDENTIAL REPORT" in direct violation of Alaska law."

Randy Evans also wrote an op-ed about Sarah Palin on The Political Vine during the 2008 election. In it he discussed the obstacles women have faced in politics and the criticisms that have been (and continue to be) leveled at Sarah Palin. A memorable quote from his article is this: "Barriers are built over time and they do not fall easily. Sometimes, it takes a political earthquake. Hurricane Hillary meet Earthquake Palin - it is a new day in American politics." A new day indeed!

A blogger at the Atlanta Journal and Constitution reported that at breakfast at the state GOP convention in Savannah yesterday morning, the GOP chairman announced that Attorney Evans would no longer serve as legal counsel for the Georgia GOP Party. As Jim Galloway reports, "Evans was leaving her for Sarah Palin, she said." According to Galloway, Evans acknowledged that he is "now doing legal work for Palin" but declined to state in what capacity.

This led to a lot of speculation in the blogosphere about the role that Attorney Evans will play. However, Sean Cockerham at the Alaska Daily News, which habitually publishes slanted headlines and articles critical of Sarah Palin, reported that he had questioned Meg Stapleton, who said that Attorney Evans was one of several attorneys consulted to make certain that the Alaska Trust Fund met legal standards but that he was not working for Sarah Palin.

Celtic Diva, who runs the Blue Oasis blog and is a bitter opponent of Sarah Palin, is up in the air about Attorney Evans's involvement. She blogged, "Sarah Palin has hired the biggest gun YET" and called Evans “the equivalent of a legal bazooka.” It appears the anklebiters are afraid their little game is just about to be over.

Whatever his role will be, Governor Palin couldn't have asked for a more qualified attorney to be involved. Attorney Evans has a formidable resume and is a prolific writer and frequent speaker on ethics in government and politics. Evans has been recognized as one of the “Best Lawyers in America.” If he does indeed serve as legal counsel for Sarah Palin, as he has for many other political figures, including Newt Gingrich and Dennis Hastert, her cause, and ultimately, that of the country she loves, will be well-served.


The Palin trust fund: the rest of the story

Fayette County News
2009-07-30

By Randy Evans

Having created The Alaska Fund Trust, I can tell you that the suggestions of illegality referenced in various Associated Press stories (which were then repeated on various cable news stories) are absolutely untrue. The truth of the matter is that the trust, which was created to help pay and defray the legal expenses associated with endless frivolous attacks against former Gov. Sarah Palin, was specifically patterned after a number of well recognized legal expense fund trusts of prior Presidential candidates as well as other high profile public servants - both Democratic and Republican.

As with the other trusts (which were subject to intense media scrutiny as well as scrutiny by well-financed political opponents and experienced lawyers of both parties), there is and was no impropriety in the creation or operation of the trust and any suggestion to the contrary is candidly absurd.

So, as Paul Harvey would have put it - here is the rest of the story.

The Alaska Fund Trust, was drafted and created to mirror the language used by the John Kerry Trust fund (named the "Fund for Truth and Honor"). This was by design (although the name "The Alaska Fund Trust" was not as clever). The idea was that if it was good enough for the leading Democratic candidate for President of the United States, then it should be good enough for the Republican Vice Presidential candidate.

Here is what the media does not report. The John Kerry Trust Fund was drafted and created by a very well respected international law firm named Perkins Coie, a huge presence in Washington, D.C. Indeed, Perkins Coie is the lead counsel for the Democratic National Committee, President Obama, and many other national Democratic leaders. Its website touts its reach and expertise in political law matters on behalf of a virtual who's who of Democratic politics.

Given its expertise, when an outside firm was selected to spearhead the investigation of The Alaska Fund Trust, it was not surprising that Perkins Coie's Alaska office would be selected. Aside from the political implications of having President Obama's and the Democratic National Committee's law firm review a trust aimed at helping with the legal expenses associated with defending the Republican Vice Presidential nominee, the Perkins Coie firm seemed like a reasonable choice. (Of course, this is like saying, other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?)

Then came the surprise. On July 14, 2009, eleven (11) days after Palin announced that she would resign, the Alaska Perkins Coie attorney submitted his conclusions about the Alaska Fund Trust. In a "CONFIDENTIAL" report (that was promptly leaked to the media in violation of Alaska law), the Alaska Perkins Coie attorney found that the trust fund document (which it had drafted for John Kerry) was in fact ILLEGAL.

Make no mistake, the Alaska Fund Trust is the exact same structure and fund created for and used by President Bill Clinton, Secretary of State and former Presidential candidate (then Senator) Hillary Clinton, former Presidential candidate (then House Minority Leader) Richard Gephardt (also represented by Perkins Coie), Senator Ted Stephens, and many, many others - from both political parties. (At the time of its creation, the Alaska Fund Trust posted all of these trust fund documents on the Alaska Fund Trust website for easy comparison and validation.)

So how could President Obama's law firm conclude that the trust fund it drafted was illegal? Well, the gist of the "CONFIDENTIAL REPORT" is that any payment of legal fees incurred defending against frivolous complaints necessarily involved an illegal personal benefit. Of course, no explanation is given why such funds were not illegal for John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Richard Gephardt, Ted Stephens (from Alaska), and so on.

Significantly, NO ONE with any experience in legal expense trust funds (including the Perkins Coie attorneys experienced in this area) has ever contended (or even suggested) that the trust fund as set up (following the Perkins Coie model for legal expense fund trusts - indeed the gold standard for legal expense trust funds) violates any law - Alaska, IRS, or federal.

The fact is that, as evidenced by the detailed legal memorandum released by the trust, the numerous trust agreements (including those prepared by Perkins Coie itself), the legal writings on the subject, and the positions of every governmental agency to consider such trusts, the Alaska Fund Trust is not only legal, but it is the most restrictive and transparent trust of any well-known public servant in history.

In the end, the only illegality in the matters surrounding the Alaska Fund Trust is the illegal leak of the 'CONFIDENTIAL REPORT" in direct violation of Alaska law, not anything to do with the trust itself.

But then, no one reports on that. Welcome to the world of Sarah Palin.

(Evans is a columnist for this paper and a longtime Georgia attorney with strong ties to the Republican Party)

http://www.fayettedailynews.com/article.php?id_news=4001


See also:

A new lawyer for Gov. Palin? (Updated with Palin saying it's not true) http://community.adn.com/alaska/node/141180

Atlantan Created Palin's Defense Fund http://www.11alive.com/news/national/story.aspx?storyid=132865&catid=166

From the state GOP convention: Sarah Palin’s new lawyer http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2009/05/16/from-the-state-gop-convention-sarah-palins-new-lawyer/

The Palin trust fund: the rest of the story http://www.fayettedailynews.com/article.php?id_news=4001

Randy Evans http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Randy_Evans

Randy Evans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Evans

Randy Evans: The man behind Palin's legal defense fund http://www.gop12.com/2009/07/randy-evans-man-behind-palins-legal.html

Report: Can Sarah Palin Defend Herself With Defense Fund? http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/palin_defense_fund/2009/07/22/238900.html

“Sarah Palin is a nice enough person, but…” http://politicalvine.com/politicalrumors/political-boxers/sarah-palin-is-a-nice-enough-person-but/

Over 600,000 Polled: 80% Support Governor Palin 2012 Run

A Newsmax.com poll reveals that nearly four out of five respondents would support Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee for president in 2012.

A slightly larger majority believe the then-Alaska governor helped John McCain in the 2008 presidential race — while only 31 percent think McCain did a good job running for president.

The poll drew more than 600,000 responses, and Newsmax will provide the results to major media and share them with radio talk show hosts across the country.

1) What is your opinion of Sarah Palin?

Favorable: 83%

Unfavorable: 17%

2) Do you believe Sarah Palin as a running mate helped or hurt John McCain?

Helped: 80%

Hurt: 20%

3) In the election between McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden, who did you vote for?

McCain-Palin: 81%

Obama-Biden: 16%

Other: 3%

4) Would you support Sarah Palin as the Republican nominee for president in 2012?

Yes: 78%

No: 22%

5) Do you believe McCain did a good job running for president?

Good Job: 31%

Bad Job: 69%

6) Do you believe Barack Obama "bought" the White House by outspending McCain?

Yes: 72%

No: 28%

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/palin_2012_newsmax_poll/2009/07/29/241397.html

The Final Word On Quitters?

Probably not. But I found this over at the E3 Gazette and thought it put to bed the notion that a "quitter" could never go further in politics. This is also a good time to remind everyone that the last time Sarah Palin "quit" her job, she ended up taking down most of the Alaskan Republican party hierarchy as well as the Governor of Alaska!

Anyway, the folks at E3 Gazette offer up an interesting wager:

Imagine a politician who is elected to one
office, then two years later loses in the Electoral College. Two years and seven
months into the term of the first office, months after the loss, this politician
resigns! Can you imagine such a "quitter" being elected POTUS in the next
election? I'll bet you $20 it can happen.




You'd lose the bet.

Andrew Jackson resigned his US Senate
seat on October 14, 1825, after two years, seven months, and ten days in that
six-year term. For those keeping score, that’s a dozen days fewer than Sarah
Palin served of her four-year term as Governor of Alaska. He won the 1828
election for President, the first to do so in the "Democratic Party" faction he
formed from the "Democratic-Republican Party". So the next time you hear a
Democrat talk about a "quitter", remind them about Old Hickory.

Something more up to date but equally appropriate is a look at Ronald Reagan, the nation’s last great conservative leader, and one of our greatest Presidents. Reagan was generally disliked by the media, the democrats, the beltway elites, and the Rockefeller wing of the Republican party, the ones we today call RINOs.

Reagan was said to stupid, a B-movie actor who worked with chimps. (They always forgot he was a two term Governor of California...much like some, including Obama called Palin the Mayor of Wasilla) Reagan was said to be lazy, intellectually uncurious, a right wing nut, a warmonger, and much more.

The thing to remember about people is they generally attack who they fear the most. Just like Reagan, if Palin was such a dolt, such a joke, they wouldn’t be spending so much time trying to marginalize her.

In the last election a lot of people were upset because they perceived that the left "chose our candidate" because John McCain was the left’s "favorite Republican" and they propped him up, only to tear him down when the actual campaign against Obama started.

Well, I say this time we should let the left pick our candidate for us, as well!

In fact, they already have. You don’t see the democrats spending one minute of time attacking Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee. Not one minute. But they have thrown every dirty trick in the book at Sarah Palin to stop her.

Unfortunately for them, Sarah Palin won’t go!

A quitter indeed.

NEW TASKS FOR A NEW DAY

Yesterday, July 27, 2009, was a day many of us have looked toward for a number of weeks; perhaps even months.

Governor Sarah Palin (R-Alaska) awakened on her first morning as Citizen Sarah Palin, Constitutionalist, Federalist, Patriot and American Freedom Fighter from Alaska.

This is indeed the day Conservatives in America got a new, dedicated and determined voice to speak up for us with no worries about who would attack her from which venue. The point is, it doesn’t really matter now. Sarah Palin can speak up for herself now.

File a charge against Citizen Sarah Palin, and she can fight back in the media just as you broke the law to do as well. Accuse her of wearing a jacket outdoors in cold Alaska, and she can tell you to go cut a hole in the ice and go fishing.

Tell her she shouldn’t be holding that fish, and she can tell you which lake she would have caught it from if she hadn’t been too busy being your governor to go fishing herself.

Tell her she shouldn’t leave the state for 24 hours after the State lawmakers have taken a week off to go to Washington, D.C., and she can tell you where she’ll be when she gets back for you to take your best shot. After you pick yourself up off the floor, you can look at her and softly say, “Did you have a nice time while you were away?”

No more Mrs. Nice Lady. The gloves can come off now. You know as well as I do that your time of blatant jealousy because she’s intelligent, beautiful, successful, devoted to her family and still in love with her husband has run its course; you can no longer accuse her of the first thing that comes to your mind just to continue wasting Alaska taxpayer money and Sarah Palin’s personal money as well.

A deep love for America, and a sincere desire to see our country returned to the basic principles upon which it was founded; religious, personal and self-governing freedoms. These are the ideas of Conservatism. We strive to repair the damage done, in our view, by the liberal force in America as a result of removing God from our society.

The liberal forces, the atheists, the socialists and the ruling elitists have had their day. It’s time for them to move on as well. A REAL Conservative voice will be leading a national force of what you formerly called “the silent majority” as we fight with the only weapons we need against you and your continued ruination of America. Her words and our votes in the next election will soon be waving at you from your own bridge to nowhere.

Our singular goal will be to return America to the greatness she once knew. We will defeat tyranny and injustice instead of allowing it to overtake us. I don’t know which of your “trusted institutions” will be the first to go, but I can assure you, before Sarah Palin and the Conservatives in America are finished, you will all be looking for a big rock to hide your shame, embarrassment and hatred for our nation.

Many years ago, we had a phrase we used to describe this feeling of Patriotism: “America. Love it or Leave it.” You remember that I’m sure. Just in case you don’t, you’re going to hear a lot of it from now on so that you can be reminded of what it means to live and enjoy the American freedoms men and women since the Revolutionary War have fought and died to provide for you.

If I have my way, the first of your institutions to go will be your atheistic church of self. Since you are obviously unfamiliar with exactly what the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says, allow me to refresh your memory.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Just a few words that take so little space yet say so much.

The argument of the separation of church and state as misinterpreted by many of today’s lawmakers and citizens is not found anywhere in the American Constitution. Given the context of this writing, the reference is, in simplified form, to a “Church of the United States” that would exist as the “American Church of Choice” in the same manner as “The Church of England” was in the country from which they had declared independence and won the freedom to govern this new nation. Instead of separating the church and the state, it separates the state and the church.

It was never the intention of our Constitution to wed the two inseparably. Instead the document was providing for the religious freedom of all citizens to believe or to not believe; not to follow a national religion which by implication carries the unspoken threat “or else”.

Our Founding Fathers held this view. First President of the United States, and the man considered “The Father of America,” George Washington, said, “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.”

In his farewell address to the nation on September 19, 1796, President George Washington remarked, "Let it simply be asked where is the security for prosperity, for reputation, for life; if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in the Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion."

John Adams, America’s second President, is quoted in an address to the military on October 11, 1798, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate for the governing of any other."

With excerpts engraved on the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. taken from his “Query XVIII of Notes on the State of Virginia in 1781, Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States remarked, "God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God?"

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." These words are attributed to James Madison, considered the Chief Architect of the US Constitution and fourth President of the U.S. [Attributed (1778) -- Gary DeMar, God and Government - A Biblical and Historical Study (Atlanta, GA: American Vision Press, 1982); Benjamin Hart, Faith & Freedom - The Christian Roots of American Liberty (Dallas, TX: Lewis and Stanley, 1988), p. 18; David Barton, The Myth of Separation (Aledo, TX: Wallbuilder Press, 1991), p. 120]

Patrick Henry, orator and Statesman, was a member of the Continental Congress and a five-time Governor of the state of Virginia. He is probably most recognized by this famous quote from March 23, 1775: “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

Henry also said, “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here." [Attributed -- Steve C. Dawson, God's Providence in America's History (Rancho Cordova, CA: Steve C. Dawson, 1988), Vol. I, p. 5.; David Barton, The Myth of Separation (Aledo, TX: Wallbuilder Press, 1991), pp. 25, 158. M. E. Bradford, The Trumpet Voice of Freedom: Patrick Henry of Virginia (Marlborough, NH: Plymouth Rock Foundation, 1991), p. iii.]

These are the words, the thoughts, the ideals, and the beliefs of our Founding Fathers. If our nation is to be returned to its full status as “The Greatest Nation on Earth”, we must return to the intentions of those who paved the way of Freedom for all of us in America. We must return God to His rightful place in our society. We must strive to restore the dedication of these great men within ourselves to fight for the America we love and the God who provided it.

Go Get 'Em, Sarah: A Post by Conservative Girl with a Voice

Sarah did it again Sunday!!! She stood tall and spoke strongly and clearly-no rambling, msm-about everything from the biased media to the problems with big government. As she spoke from the heart-something she does better than any politician I have ever heard since Ronald Reagan, I heard that fighting spirit that her supporters have come to know and love. Her final speech as governor definitely illustrated the passion and love she had as governor of the great state of Alaska, yet also illustrated her intended desire to spread the common sense message Americans, like myself, are so eager to hear.



There were many parts of the speech that I loved. In true maverick fashion, Sarah gave the media a piece of her mind, which as a former journalism student captivated my heart. All my regular readers now how I feel about what the media have become, and I commend the gov for letting the media have it so to speak. As a former journalist, she studied the same thing in school that I did, and the so-called media of today have become unrecognizable. As Sarah mentioned in her farewell speech, the media of today find it totally acceptable to report false stories and take unfair shots at children of political candidates, which not surprisingly never includes the children of President Obama. Unfortunately these issues have become so commonplace that it is hard to identify the truth anymore. For more on media bias, scroll down and read my post entitled "Slime Journalism."



A highlight from her farewell speech came when Sarah told the crowd that she was going to use her first-amendment right. This spoke volumes to me because this is what America is all about, but sometimes you wouldn't even know it in the age of Obama. In Obama's world, if someone chooses to speak out against him or any of his policies, it is as if they are committing treason. Whatever happened to the America in which speaking out was a right, not a punishment? Sarah hit the nail on the head with her assessment regarding the first-amendment; it's about time someone reminds us that we have the right to stand up and hold our politicians and government officials accountable for they work for US!


Sarah's words on the government in general were also very inspiring and right on target. We live in an age in which the government is taking over our lives. Simple daily acts are becoming harder to achieve because the government has decided that it knows how to run our lives better than we do. I don't know about you, but I sure as hell don't want the same government that has virtually bankrupted our children's futures in charge of my healthcare decisions. The common phrase, "government's the problem, not the solution" could not be more true. Sarah gets it when it comes to government. Like us, she KNOWS a smaller government is a more efficient government. With spending out of control, the government keeps assuming it knows best when WE the people REALLY know what is best for us and our families. This is what is so refreshing about Sarah- she understands; she gets it. Why can't the msm and liberal haters see this? The answer is easy:They are too blinded to what is really going on. Instead of reporting the facts about the threat of big goverment, they continue to sugarcoat the truth. Luckily we have Sarah to give us the straight talk we so desperately crave! Sarah is our voice in these hard times, and is not afraid to give us the facts. Thank God! It's about time someone cares for average Americans. This is a woman who loves her country and actually takes the time to thank our military men and women instead of apologizing for their actions on the battlefield. I'm sick and tired of the apologies, and I have a feeling Sarah is too. It's about time someone took a stand. As the days go by, she is going to be our voice, and I couldn't be more thrilled and excited to have her as the voice of reason. So rock on, Sarah, and continue to speak out because we ARE listening!!!!


I'm a Conservative Girl with a Voice. Check out my blog at http://conservativegirlwithavoice.blogspot.com and become a follower-Thanks!

(On a side note, I just want to thank fabulous Sarah Palin's hairdresser extraordinaire Jessica Steele, of the fabulous Beehive Beauty Shop in Wasilla, AK for sending me the beautiful Beehive Beauty Shop T-shirt. I love it and will wear it proudly!)

Video: Øbama & Democrats Conspire Against Governor Palin (Dems tried to ban from youtube)

Link:

Luntz & Hannity: Gov Palin CLEARLY A Candidate For 2012